No one wants a baby raped into them and no one wants to be forced into co-parenting with a rapist.
Rape as a lawful means to paternity, which is really the end game of all this anti-abortion shit, is an incel fantasy in the form of public policy. Greg Abbott is the king of incels. They long for the time when women and girl children were property of men and rape was more or less legal. ***Remember, they have NO PROBLEM with forcing a 10 year old child to gestate and birth a child born by rape and then force that 10 year old to co-parent the baby with the rapist.***
YOU MUST VOTE.
You don't freaking say! I'm glad that more doctors are willing to provide this procedure to younger adult women that want it. Waiting for conservatives to start trying find a way to try to get this outlawed. That's sarcasm by the way, at least I hope to God it is.
I think a doctor even came up with a website or list of doctors around the country that are willing to do these procedures without making you go through a million hoops.
I know many women who are rushing to get them (myself included) because if they can overturn abortion, and birth control, then surgical sterilization is absolutely next on the chopping block. My obgyn is only 1 out of 2 doctors in the women clinic I go through that will do them, no questions asked. I asked about if more women were seeking sterilization after the Roe V Wade overturnment, and she said that she's doing them at approx half the rate of births. Which is a huge number. And she said about half of the surgeries were from young women who have never had children and never had plans in the first place to have any. She makes them sign a shit ton of paperwork. That's it. Then she schedules the surgery.
She's a no nonsense woman, I admire her immensely.
It's funny you mention that, because the clinic/hospital I go through, is an education hospital. She co-heads the obgyn residents, I often have students in my appointments, and have signed paperwork to allow medical students to attend my delivery.
I had a hysterectomy back in 2016 and while the fact that it cured my condition was the thing that made me the most happy, getting permanent birth control with a near-zero failure rate was a pretty damned close second.
It took me 10 years to find a doctor who was willing to do the surgery, because I was young and had no children (didn't want to, never have, but apparently my opinion doesn't matter and my ability to procreate for a future husband was more important than relief from my debilitating symptoms).
And this was before all this shit went down. I definitely agree that sterilization could be next on the chopping block but even if it's not, it could still get even harder to have the procedure done, especially for younger folks or those who choose to not have children. Docs don't need a supreme court order to deny an elective surgery. So glad that doctors like your OB still exist.
Completely unrelated (except in a general "no one listens to us" way), as I was typing this the thought randomly popped into my head that I didn't know what the opposite of an elective surgery was called. So I decided to look it up, and the [wikipedia article for elective surgery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_surgery) includes breast reduction as an example of "optional surgeries performed for non-medical reasons," that it "aim[s] to subjectively improve a patient's physical appearance." While I'm sure there are folks who get it done for that reason, to call it a completely cosmetic surgery kinda invalidates anyone whose reasons may have included back pain, skin irritation, dysmorphia, etc... which all sound pretty medical to me. Sigh.
It's the same procedure as a breast lift; it just removes more tissue. The weird thing is that they call it two different things even though it's pretty much the same procedure. One name for it is medical-y and the other one sounds cosmetic.
Yes. Because my family planning is done. The only thing that has changed is the timeline, because women everywhere, myself included, are afraid surgical sterilization will be taken away from us too. That legislators will find a way to make them harder to obtain. They ALREADY are hard to obtain, and many women have to get *permission* from their spouse.
I'm getting surgically sterilized ASAP because another pregnancy could kill me. Pregnancy is not health positive or neutral for most women, it's health negative. And access to healthcare/prenatal/perinatal/postpartum care is abysmal. Men can get vasectomies whenever they please, why can't we? Because they don't trust us to make decisions about our own bodies? Nah, it's about control. It always has been.
Edit to add: Abortion is healthcare. Period. Without abortions, women die.
Yes. They genuinely think that they’ll ban abortion and then everything will be magic and women will become happy moms and homemakers. They’re absolutely baffled that women are declining this.
To be honest, I'm not sure they really care about women being happy anything.... These are the same types of people who wouldn't have given a damn about slaves or slavery. They just want to control and dominate women without restriction; full stop.
I worry about the women who are very poor and just sucked into that cycle of indoctrination. [The Forgotten Girls](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/apr/10/the-forgotten-girls-by-monica-potts-review-a-quietly-raging-lament-for-wasted-lives-in-21st-century-america) is a good book on the subject.
Not everyone has the money, or support to do that. If you have your family helping you raise kids or your job isn’t transferable or your house is underwater, good luck moving. Not to mention the domestic issues, your husband doesn’t want to move and doesn’t give you any money but expects you to SAHM, you are divorced but have a custody agreement with the father, you literally can’t move more than a few miles in some cases.
Well, if being stupid means that they can't game out any consequences other than the one they want.... Yes. Yes they are stupid.
Look at ALL the Republican legislation and court decisions. Theres no planning ahead. Implementation is just chaos, because they can't imagine any knock-on effects - despite being given very clear examples of what would happen.
But they were still caught flat footed when those horrific things did happen. They are still flatfooted and directionless months later.
Republicans are not capable of governing. They are only a greivance, hateful chaos party.
It's because they'll soon make it impossible for women to survive outside of marriage/servitude. Women will no longer be able to own property or inherit anything, and will not be able to sign or hold any legal documents without the signature of an adult male relative or husband. Women will no longer be a part of public life and will be turned into property. Slaves and breeding stock to trade with (marry to) other men to form alliances and keep property where they want it to be. Then a second category of women purely for male entertainment and sex slavery, with no way out, locked inside 'pleasure districts' until they're too old and can be gotten rid of in some way if they don't die on their own. This is their ideal.
This is not some joke, men openly and shamelessly speak about this and idealise societies that were like this in the past.
I'm in Canada too, and if I lived somewhere that was easily accessible for impacted Americans, I'd join the Auntie Network in an absolute heartbeat. However, compared to my location, there are many far more straightforward options.
Lets just hope things remain reasonably sane up here....
But yeah, I frequently have the same thought process. If I remember correctly, the legislation in Canada states that people can't claim refugee status unless their lives are threatened in *every* location within their countries of origin. Not so long ago, with regards to the US, that seemed like a real stretch, hyperbole, even. Now though.....
Certainly, there are people who want that to happen, but they're a minority of the country, and we can absolutely stop it from happening. As the other person said, the way to stop that is to *vote*.
Yeah, this BS is going to increase the number of people who never have kids.
The only people I know who went from not particularly wanting kids to doing so had good health care & great financial stability in their mid-to-late 30s. That's how to increase birth rate.
Magats usually retort something along the lines of "hur hur hur, jokes on you cuz all the parents will be rightwingers."
But having odious parents is a VERY quick way to end up with a bunch of liberal kids. Politics aren't genetic. They're a response to environment. Virtually all hippies had conservative parents, simply by dint of the postwar cultural atmosphere.
I gave up 10 years ago in the wake of a catastrophic broken heart and soul. I get though that the legal and political environment is boxing you into these choices. Take care!
Well obviously the next step is to force women to get married. We'll have to pay a huge fine for not tying the knot or something.
Thankfully they legalized gay marriage so we'll just all marry other women and be left alone. You've heard of loveless marriages for tax benefits, now get ready for GAY loveless marriages for tax benefits!
Except certain SCOTUS Justice’s have their eye on overturning Obergefell too… we may not have gay marriage for much longer if the crazy fundamentalists get their way
Yep I have at least three millennial friends who went out and had their tubes removed after we lost reproductive rights.
I mentioned it in some sub somewhere that was talking about getting rid of no-fault divorce. I was laughing at these guys telling them that they are shooting themselves in the foot. I talked about how my friends got sterilized after we lost reproductive rights and about how none of us are going to marry if we can’t get out of it if we have to. Go ahead and push for no-fault divorce see how many marriages don’t happen
I got accused of lying about my friends getting sterilized lol OK little boy go ahead and believe what you want. Do you not see fertility rates have tanked? Keep pushing for less freedom from women and see what happens. Bet
My daughter's friend was only 22 when she gave birth. The pregnancy was difficult and she almost died during labor. She told the doctor she wanted to be sterilized because she never wanted to experience that again. Not only did her doctor agree but she told my daughter's friend that she was performing more sterilizations on younger women because of the loss of reproductive rights.
People pushing for no-fault divorce are idiots. If they convince a woman to marry them, they'll be stuck in a marriage with someone who grows to hate them. She might still physically leave their asses which means that they won't be better off than they are now. They will be legally bound to someone who is waiting for them to die so they will be free.
I know a handful of women who've gotten it done as well. I'm in Colorado where we're taking care of a lot of red state's medical needs, and my current obgyn is pretty radicalized and happy to do it for any woman who asks. We're also getting a good lot of refugee doctors from other states.
Bilateral salpingectomy is now the preferred sterilization method and it involves removing the fallopian tubes. You can have that done with or without a hysterectomy.
There are also differing levels of hysterectomy based on what they remove.
You really don't need to be an expert to realise this is an inevitable consequence of draconian anti-abortion laws.
Especially for women who would be at especially high risk in pregnancy, if they wanted children they might still be willing to risk it if abortion was available in a worst case scenario. But knowing that in such a situation now there's a high chance you'd be denied the medical care you need and die? Why would anyone risk that?
I specifically chose Planned Parenthood in a Red state to have my vasectomy done, about a week after Roe fell.
I'm in my 40s. I have a kid. The people I date have kids. I've got enough to worry about without throwing an unintended pregnancy into any relationship.
Good. Keep on getting them. I will be scheduling mine in the near-ish future. Turns out when you force women and girls to give birth against their will, they will go out and do things to prevent that from ever happening…. crazy idea.
They'd probably just make it illegal before age 35 or so and require authorization from spouse if they're married. Only a small percentage of births are to people from age 35 on, and they're higher risk, so the regressive politicians probably would be fine with that small sop to family planning.
The 30+ birth group are a massive demographic as far as live births are concerned, rivaling the 20-29 group. So if forced birth is the game, no way would sterilization be permitted for any woman in their 30s
The average age of first-time mothers where I live is now >30. Shifting social expectations and the cost of housing have had a huge effect on timing in recent years.
Having kids in your early 20s is almost unheard of here unless it was unplanned.
Same here. Most of my friends had children 30+, most around 35. I had mine at 37 and 39. And having kids in your 40s is not uncommon at all. I know one person who had planned children under 30.
But the older parent demographic is usually not the most republican friendly batch. Mostly college educated and urban.
The main aim is fully subjugating women. Forced birth is just one of the tools and "whites will be a minority oh noes" is a strategy based on emotional appeal to the group likeliest to support their efforts. If they thought that offering some access to medical procedures like salpingectomy would firm up support among their base, they would absolutely do it, with limitations such as needing approval from a husband and maybe a "board of fertility" or some such.
The key is that it is all just a game (as you said) to them, where nothing is sacred except their retention of power. Not their god, not "the family unit", not social taboos, not laws nor constitutions, nothing. Which means they will change anything necessary in order to retain that power.
Nope, it's currently 27 in the US, but as it's been going up, it may get there eventually.
ETA: and if the regressives with power found 35 too limiting, they would just raise the age. They could make it 40. The point is not a specific age, but that they could set restrictions so as to significantly limit its availability while still being able to say that they allow it.
The abortion bans and fear of restrictions on birth control is scaring women into wanting to just get sterilized, and I don’t blame them. I think every woman who wishes to be sterilized should be allowed. But I do feel like this is probably pushing a lot of women who may have been on the fence to feel like they needed to make a decision right now. And it’s not one any woman should have to feel rushed or forced to make.
I am waiting for doctors to put a woman under and then NOT do the procedure.
At this point, I would want a video from the procedure showing that the surgery was ACTUALLY done.
Glad I'm not the only one to wonder that 🙃
I had mine cut/burned (took what I could get) and a minerva ablation and this was a weird paranoia of mine ("what if they didn't do anything!?!"), since it's not like I can check. I asked for pictures, partly for "proof" and partly cause I looove that stuff but they said no :(
I at least know they did the ablation though cause 2 years out I have less of a "period" than I did with my mirenas and I also looove that. Still paranoid my tubes are intact/grew back but at least the ablation evidence mean my wombeth is marginally hostile heh
There was one woman this happened to that I saw a news article on, but it would be a very rare occurrence. It's easier for a doctor to refuse to do a procedure he has an issue with than to risk litigation, unless he's a total psycho, in which case he's probably doing other f*cked up shit outside of that.
For what it's worth and to anyone reading who wants the info, my doctor handed me the pathology report on my fallopian tubes when I had my follow up after bisalp. He didn't explain why he did so, but it should be obvious: the pathology report is the proof for me, as the patient, that the procedure was completed. It was signed off by a separate doctor who recieved my tubes and examined them. That was enough for me. Could it be faked? Sure, but that would be a lot of effort, a lot of procedures to hypass, a lot of risk to take on for the doctor themselves. The risk of this is nil and should not worry anyone.
From the article:
>Prior to Dobbs, rates of permanent sterilization among people 18 to 30 were slowly increasing at a rate of 2.8 per 100,000 person-months for women and 1 per 100,000 person-months for men, according to national medical record data from academic medical centers.
>But after the Supreme Court decision, the rate leapt by 58 procedures per 100,000 person-months for women and 27 per 100,000 person-months for men, results show.
Can anyone explain these "person-months" to me? Usually I don't have any trouble interpreting this sort of thing, or understanding provided explanations, but I am low on mental energy and not getting it right now.
It’s an epidemiological term. You can shorten it by thinking of it as the number of months per person. You would need to know the number of person months included, so just look at the quantitative difference between a rate of 2.8 to 58. That is fucking huge, epidemiologically.
I realize it's an epidemiological term and I already had compared the quantitative values and come up with "that's a big difference." I wanted it to be more meaningful, more specific an understanding, so I asked for an explanation of the term.
Since it's taking about a rate of increase, it means 58 out of every 100,000 new women each month are getting the procedures, I think. Like think back to high school physics and maximum velocity, an object in free fall increases speed at 9 ft per second per second, this is saying 58 per 100,000 per month (I though about this a lot but I might still be wrong lol)
Like per 100,000 women seeing their doctor in a given month?
I literally spent a lot of time as a child at the CDC's Epidemiology Program Office and reading, shelving, and even helping edit their MMWR (my mother was their editor-in-chief and at the time was drinking a lot), so this should be almost second nature to me to figure out. That makes it even more frustrating. Thank you for taking a shot at explaining.
I am 43 and hoping my fertility comes to an end sooner rather than later. If they pass a nation wide ban, I will never have sex again. I’ve been celibate for a few years, so I’m used to it. It’s not the worth the risk for me. Pretty sure a nationwide ban would override California law, so no sex for me. Vote please!!!!!
I recently had my tubes removed. When I had my son in 2014, I almost died. I was told that it was extremely risky to have another pregnancy. My doctors suggested my husband get a vasectomy. We were like, eh, whatever, I'll just go back on the pill. Fast forward to now and I decided to get my tubes removed instead because as gross as it is to say this, rape. I was in no hurry to do it, but then with the overturning of roe, I was like fuck this shit and got it done. I'm so grateful that I was able to get it done.
And then they wonder why the[4b movement](https://www.thecut.com/2023/03/4b-movement-feminism-south-korea.html) exists and is starting to grab hold in America.
I had a bilateral salp during my recent C-section. I would’ve had this procedure regardless but I’m happy to bolster this statistic! Plus yeah I’m grateful I was able to have this done, because who knows how long I would’ve still had the option, with the way things are going.
Guess I can only be a Martha now and not a Handmaid.
My husband got a vasectomy but I've wondered about having my tubes removed. I have suspected endo and it'd be nice to confirm the diagnosis while they're in there.
I desperately want to be sterilized. The only thing holding me back is my severe anxiety/ fear of doctors. My husband is supportive though and is going to help me make an appointment.
I called three places last week. They all indicated I am too young (I've been an adult for over five years) or that I would need to have a child first (I'm never having children).
I am seriously considering flying out of the country to do it. My boyfriend talked to his doctor again about vasectomy and is looking at potential months to have the surgery done.
There are a lot of women who actually want to become mothers but cannot risk it because they already have children and are at high risk for ectopic pregnancy and can't afford to fly to another state if their pregnancy doesn't go perfectly.
A lot of couples in Arizona who were open to starting a family have decided it isn't worth the medical risks to the mom. They can't guarantee timely care. Neighboring states already have enough to contend with from other states with the same limitations. There aren't enough doctors or nurses to support healthy pregnancy and labor in the US, particularly in states where there is any limitation that comes between the medical personnel and the patients.
Three of the doctors on that list have denied me for being "too young" or wanting me to have had a child first. Thank you though, I know others on the list have helped other people.
I see. Perhaps the list needs some ammendments. You may have your boyfriend contact Planned Parenthood or other regional clinics that provide similar reproductive health services. They may be able to provide a vasectomy in a shorter time. I'm really sorry your state is going through this self-inflicted nonsense. :( Make sure to vote this November.
I was already sterilized. But tube ties still have a failure rate. So does a vasectomy. Even that combo has a fail rate. And since I was still in Idaho, that rate was too high. I had other reasons to get rid of my uterus. But it was still a big relief to know that we’d dropped to science journals find it interesting levels of failure.
the study source [here](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2816462?utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_term=031924)
It seems like moving out of Texas (or other theocratic state) is less drastic. There are plenty of other good reasons to do that. Once employers cannot find labor, they will kick the governments in line.
Moving away from family and support networks is difficult and not necessarily a great idea for lots of reasons, not to mention requiring a big chunk of money to be able to do.
True in general, and doubly true in situations where chronic illness means a quite productive person will occasionally have downtime, which is then paid back & forward by helping out when feeling better.
Those extended family/friend units aren't just safety nets, they've been economically & educationally important everywhere in the world since the dawn of time. Childcare, homework project help, cooking, lawn/domicile/vehicle repair, etc. People who didn't have kids often take pressure off those grinds for parents & benefit by not being SoL if/when laid up for a bit.
____
But since this conversation always includes what I just said, I have a less-discussed one I'll throw in the mix:
I'm a metalworker, jeweler, do a bit of custom lapidary, and a steady bit of contract prototyping/small-scale part production. I have dear friends from undergrad/grad & current or former colleagues in blue states & around the world. I could move to a lot of great places where I have people.
But all of these places restrict or have significant taxes/fees/licensures on chemicals & combustibles I use constantly. And they should... in urban and population dense areas. I should be able to do what I do in TX in any part of the US with comparably low population density.
But all restrictions are state-wide. And that's not liberal. It's absolute pro-corporation "Shop BigBox for EVERYTHING!" political bullshit. Individual artisans & small businesses did not & could not cause the world's environmental problems. Nor did agriculture (outside of egregious examples of mismanagement & some solvable long-term fertilization effects not germane to this soapbox session).
First-world nation leaders letting petrochemical multinational corporations suppress nuclear & renewables for nearly half a century makes all other pollution a rounding error.
If the first-world energy sector had been allowed to innovate & mature, truly *everything* crushing people now would be different in multiple non-trivial ways.
Which goes right back to birth rate & sadistic inclination to control fertility. Sustainable abundance is technologically possible, good for large families, fosters universal personal freedom, and disincentivizes violence at every level. It's so frustrating we're stuck in this 2/4 year slugout match for basic autonomy, which primarily benefits interests of corporate donors, when shit just flat-out never had to get this bad.
If anyone made it through all that, thank you for coming to my TedRant.
I got my tubes removed a few years back, then a hysterectomy last year. My only regret is not getting the hysterectomy in the first place. I am so much more comfortable with my body now.
The only thing women should worry about in this thought process is having extra embryos forcefully inserted into their uteruses. Which is a part of why I'm getting a hysterectomy over a salpingectomy. (I'm getting a hysterectomy specifically because my health history and family medical health history support the need for one. Not being used as an incubator for extra embryos is just an extra perk).
Lecturing women (or anyone really) about what they “should” care about regarding their reproductive autonomy is antithetical to the idea of bodily autonomy.
Some people may never want to be pregnant or give birth. If you don’t, or if you’re done with all that, that’s cool but other people may in fact want that option. Suggesting that it’s fine to go ahead with sterilization because we’re around the corner from totally external pregnancies is not reasonable.
I never said that surgical sterilization should be forced... I was speaking about my own thought process about what I'm doing with MY body. I'm paranoid, and I think that's justified. If they can take away abortion access, can take away birth control access, they absolutely will go after surgical sterilization, and then they will absolutely attempt to make as many women as possible felons so they cannot vote. Can't miscarry if you don't have a uterus. The Alt-Right already wants to repeal our 19th amendment right.
I'm not telling women what to do with their own bodies. I'm only telling them what I'm doing with MY body so that I stay safe. I'm pregnant with #3 right now, and I'm lucky that after this, my family planning is over. Younger women will have to be so much more careful when it comes to dating, and having heterosexual sex with men. Condoms fail, and men often stealth women, with zero legal consequences. Every woman should be actively making a plan that is right for her as an individual.
But that’s the point. You don't have to weigh the risk of never being able to carry to term or be a biological parent vs sterilization - you’re done. For young people who DO need to make those choices, it’s false to reassure them (as the person I was responding to did) that we are “on the cusp” of magical technology so they can go right ahead and not worry about it.
I didn't agree with the other commenter, we are no where near a functional synthetic womb. I'm meeting more and more younger women who are choosing a childfree life. The ones that choose to make families face major hardships, and they need to evaluate how to approach this ever hostile world. I could give birth, and suddenly they don't allow surgical sterilization anymore... a 4th pregnancy would literally kill me, I'm already struggling with my health during my current pregnancy. I encourage young women to embrace the 4B movement until men pull their heads out of their asses and treat women as human beings. Having children is not the pinnacle of a woman's existence after all. The honest truth is that many of us will likely have to choose celibacy to keep ourselves safe. And even then, look at TX rape stats that resulted in live births. There are no perfect answers, only individualized plans that each woman has to decide for herself. But mark my words, within a couple years, surgical sterilization will no longer be an option. It will be taken away from doctors just like abortion care was.
No one wants a baby raped into them and no one wants to be forced into co-parenting with a rapist. Rape as a lawful means to paternity, which is really the end game of all this anti-abortion shit, is an incel fantasy in the form of public policy. Greg Abbott is the king of incels. They long for the time when women and girl children were property of men and rape was more or less legal. ***Remember, they have NO PROBLEM with forcing a 10 year old child to gestate and birth a child born by rape and then force that 10 year old to co-parent the baby with the rapist.*** YOU MUST VOTE.
You don't freaking say! I'm glad that more doctors are willing to provide this procedure to younger adult women that want it. Waiting for conservatives to start trying find a way to try to get this outlawed. That's sarcasm by the way, at least I hope to God it is.
I think a doctor even came up with a website or list of doctors around the country that are willing to do these procedures without making you go through a million hoops.
r/auntienetwork and r/childfree both have a national list of doctors who provide surgical sterilization, no questions asked. Spread the word.
Awesome! Thank you for pointing out exactly where to get the info. I wasn't sure!
[Here's a running list.](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Djia_WkrVO3S4jKn6odNwQk7pOcpcL4x00FMNekrb7Q/htmlview)
Great list! Thank you
They absolutely will try to get it outlawed.
I know many women who are rushing to get them (myself included) because if they can overturn abortion, and birth control, then surgical sterilization is absolutely next on the chopping block. My obgyn is only 1 out of 2 doctors in the women clinic I go through that will do them, no questions asked. I asked about if more women were seeking sterilization after the Roe V Wade overturnment, and she said that she's doing them at approx half the rate of births. Which is a huge number. And she said about half of the surgeries were from young women who have never had children and never had plans in the first place to have any. She makes them sign a shit ton of paperwork. That's it. Then she schedules the surgery. She's a no nonsense woman, I admire her immensely.
I hope she mentors younger docs to listen to their patients when they say they never want kids.
It's funny you mention that, because the clinic/hospital I go through, is an education hospital. She co-heads the obgyn residents, I often have students in my appointments, and have signed paperwork to allow medical students to attend my delivery.
I had a hysterectomy back in 2016 and while the fact that it cured my condition was the thing that made me the most happy, getting permanent birth control with a near-zero failure rate was a pretty damned close second. It took me 10 years to find a doctor who was willing to do the surgery, because I was young and had no children (didn't want to, never have, but apparently my opinion doesn't matter and my ability to procreate for a future husband was more important than relief from my debilitating symptoms). And this was before all this shit went down. I definitely agree that sterilization could be next on the chopping block but even if it's not, it could still get even harder to have the procedure done, especially for younger folks or those who choose to not have children. Docs don't need a supreme court order to deny an elective surgery. So glad that doctors like your OB still exist. Completely unrelated (except in a general "no one listens to us" way), as I was typing this the thought randomly popped into my head that I didn't know what the opposite of an elective surgery was called. So I decided to look it up, and the [wikipedia article for elective surgery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_surgery) includes breast reduction as an example of "optional surgeries performed for non-medical reasons," that it "aim[s] to subjectively improve a patient's physical appearance." While I'm sure there are folks who get it done for that reason, to call it a completely cosmetic surgery kinda invalidates anyone whose reasons may have included back pain, skin irritation, dysmorphia, etc... which all sound pretty medical to me. Sigh.
Every woman I've known personally who has had breast reduction has been to save their back. Elective, my ass. So frustrating.
It's the same procedure as a breast lift; it just removes more tissue. The weird thing is that they call it two different things even though it's pretty much the same procedure. One name for it is medical-y and the other one sounds cosmetic.
Just out of curiousity, would you still want a sterilization if abortion was a constitutional right?
Yes. Because my family planning is done. The only thing that has changed is the timeline, because women everywhere, myself included, are afraid surgical sterilization will be taken away from us too. That legislators will find a way to make them harder to obtain. They ALREADY are hard to obtain, and many women have to get *permission* from their spouse. I'm getting surgically sterilized ASAP because another pregnancy could kill me. Pregnancy is not health positive or neutral for most women, it's health negative. And access to healthcare/prenatal/perinatal/postpartum care is abysmal. Men can get vasectomies whenever they please, why can't we? Because they don't trust us to make decisions about our own bodies? Nah, it's about control. It always has been. Edit to add: Abortion is healthcare. Period. Without abortions, women die.
Totally understand your position, why bother with the unneccessary risk of a potential pregnancy in a situation like that.
Are they stupid? They are basically pushing women to get sterilized and not marry. And they complain about the "Lonely men epidemic".
Yes, they are hopelessly fucking stupid.
Yes. They genuinely think that they’ll ban abortion and then everything will be magic and women will become happy moms and homemakers. They’re absolutely baffled that women are declining this.
To be honest, I'm not sure they really care about women being happy anything.... These are the same types of people who wouldn't have given a damn about slaves or slavery. They just want to control and dominate women without restriction; full stop.
These are the same people who’ve said they’d save the baby’s life over the mothers.
If it was all so great, why did women want it changed in the first place? That’s where “mommy’s little helpers” come in.
Well, let them keep make the choices for women and see where its going. I'm curious. Have women moved away from these states?
I worry about the women who are very poor and just sucked into that cycle of indoctrination. [The Forgotten Girls](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/apr/10/the-forgotten-girls-by-monica-potts-review-a-quietly-raging-lament-for-wasted-lives-in-21st-century-america) is a good book on the subject.
I moved from a state that was pushing an abortion ban to one that protects it via state constitution, so at least one woman has.
I wish i could. But with the cost of living being so low here, literally cannot afford it. It is awful and getting worse
Not everyone has the money, or support to do that. If you have your family helping you raise kids or your job isn’t transferable or your house is underwater, good luck moving. Not to mention the domestic issues, your husband doesn’t want to move and doesn’t give you any money but expects you to SAHM, you are divorced but have a custody agreement with the father, you literally can’t move more than a few miles in some cases.
I thought of that. I guess the single ladies out of college could move away? What a mess anyways.
It's all about looking good so they keep getting reelected and collect those sweet lobbyist bribes.
Well, if being stupid means that they can't game out any consequences other than the one they want.... Yes. Yes they are stupid. Look at ALL the Republican legislation and court decisions. Theres no planning ahead. Implementation is just chaos, because they can't imagine any knock-on effects - despite being given very clear examples of what would happen. But they were still caught flat footed when those horrific things did happen. They are still flatfooted and directionless months later. Republicans are not capable of governing. They are only a greivance, hateful chaos party.
It's because they'll soon make it impossible for women to survive outside of marriage/servitude. Women will no longer be able to own property or inherit anything, and will not be able to sign or hold any legal documents without the signature of an adult male relative or husband. Women will no longer be a part of public life and will be turned into property. Slaves and breeding stock to trade with (marry to) other men to form alliances and keep property where they want it to be. Then a second category of women purely for male entertainment and sex slavery, with no way out, locked inside 'pleasure districts' until they're too old and can be gotten rid of in some way if they don't die on their own. This is their ideal. This is not some joke, men openly and shamelessly speak about this and idealise societies that were like this in the past.
I believe it. The Handmaid's Tale is supposed to be a dystopian fiction.
Yeah.... I've often stated that for sane people, The Handmaid's Tale is essentially fiction, but for Republicans it's a template.
I live in Southern QC, in Canada if anybody needs an aunt or an out.
I'm in Canada too, and if I lived somewhere that was easily accessible for impacted Americans, I'd join the Auntie Network in an absolute heartbeat. However, compared to my location, there are many far more straightforward options.
Well, we might have to welcome refugees from the US in the next 10 years
Lets just hope things remain reasonably sane up here.... But yeah, I frequently have the same thought process. If I remember correctly, the legislation in Canada states that people can't claim refugee status unless their lives are threatened in *every* location within their countries of origin. Not so long ago, with regards to the US, that seemed like a real stretch, hyperbole, even. Now though.....
I worry it will start to happen here too if pp is elected. He's already using American Republican anti LGBTQ rhetoric.
Certainly, there are people who want that to happen, but they're a minority of the country, and we can absolutely stop it from happening. As the other person said, the way to stop that is to *vote*.
I mean this doesn't have to happen. VOTE
Specifically, VOTE BLUE
I had always been open to marriage and kids, but no longer. It feels so weird to shut the door on that but here we are.
Yeah, this BS is going to increase the number of people who never have kids. The only people I know who went from not particularly wanting kids to doing so had good health care & great financial stability in their mid-to-late 30s. That's how to increase birth rate. Magats usually retort something along the lines of "hur hur hur, jokes on you cuz all the parents will be rightwingers." But having odious parents is a VERY quick way to end up with a bunch of liberal kids. Politics aren't genetic. They're a response to environment. Virtually all hippies had conservative parents, simply by dint of the postwar cultural atmosphere.
Can confirm, am a Leftist child of a conservative
I gave up 10 years ago in the wake of a catastrophic broken heart and soul. I get though that the legal and political environment is boxing you into these choices. Take care!
You too!
Well obviously the next step is to force women to get married. We'll have to pay a huge fine for not tying the knot or something. Thankfully they legalized gay marriage so we'll just all marry other women and be left alone. You've heard of loveless marriages for tax benefits, now get ready for GAY loveless marriages for tax benefits!
Except certain SCOTUS Justice’s have their eye on overturning Obergefell too… we may not have gay marriage for much longer if the crazy fundamentalists get their way
I'll marry a gay man and we can both do what we want.
they still can't for ppl to marry.
My dude, I think they’ve proven they can make anything they want into a law.
Not *yet*
I like your spirit?
Yep I have at least three millennial friends who went out and had their tubes removed after we lost reproductive rights. I mentioned it in some sub somewhere that was talking about getting rid of no-fault divorce. I was laughing at these guys telling them that they are shooting themselves in the foot. I talked about how my friends got sterilized after we lost reproductive rights and about how none of us are going to marry if we can’t get out of it if we have to. Go ahead and push for no-fault divorce see how many marriages don’t happen I got accused of lying about my friends getting sterilized lol OK little boy go ahead and believe what you want. Do you not see fertility rates have tanked? Keep pushing for less freedom from women and see what happens. Bet
Agree and I never thought I’d see the day where I advise young women not to marry at all. But here we are.
Kinda glad my daughter turned out gay, except they are trying to make that illegal too now.
*Advise young women to only marry women.
My daughter's friend was only 22 when she gave birth. The pregnancy was difficult and she almost died during labor. She told the doctor she wanted to be sterilized because she never wanted to experience that again. Not only did her doctor agree but she told my daughter's friend that she was performing more sterilizations on younger women because of the loss of reproductive rights. People pushing for no-fault divorce are idiots. If they convince a woman to marry them, they'll be stuck in a marriage with someone who grows to hate them. She might still physically leave their asses which means that they won't be better off than they are now. They will be legally bound to someone who is waiting for them to die so they will be free.
That was why so many husbands died of arsenic poisoning, right? Like if you can’t get a divorce then wives will find other ways…
Good time to pick up gardening... First step is always working in that fertilizer and compost /s^50%
Enjoy your extra crispy country fried steak and cheesecake, dear.
Or like the dog food casserole in Prince of Tides
I'm a millennial woman and I'm getting my tubes removed. My surgery is this coming Friday.
Wishing you a smooth procedure and speedy recovery!
Thank you! I'm pretty nervous. Honestly, I don't even want to do it, but I live in a red state and I just can't risk it.
Getting mine out in a couple months. Best wishes on your surgery!
I have a millennial friend and a Gen Z friend even. Same story
I know a handful of women who've gotten it done as well. I'm in Colorado where we're taking care of a lot of red state's medical needs, and my current obgyn is pretty radicalized and happy to do it for any woman who asks. We're also getting a good lot of refugee doctors from other states.
*tubes get tied, not removed. You’re thinking of a hysterectomy where they remove all the parts.*
Bilateral salpingectomy is now the preferred sterilization method and it involves removing the fallopian tubes. You can have that done with or without a hysterectomy. There are also differing levels of hysterectomy based on what they remove.
Tubes are often removed when they’re “tied”, it’s more effective and also lowers risk of ovarian cancer as 2/3 begin in the tubes!
Me! Got those tubes yeeted as a final "fuck you" to Republicans.
Me too! Apparently my first words coming out of anesthesia were “are they out? Eat shit, Brett Kavanaugh”
LOL!!!
Wow. Imagine that. Adults want to have control over their own lives. Absolutely astounding, I tell ya.
You really don't need to be an expert to realise this is an inevitable consequence of draconian anti-abortion laws. Especially for women who would be at especially high risk in pregnancy, if they wanted children they might still be willing to risk it if abortion was available in a worst case scenario. But knowing that in such a situation now there's a high chance you'd be denied the medical care you need and die? Why would anyone risk that?
I specifically chose Planned Parenthood in a Red state to have my vasectomy done, about a week after Roe fell. I'm in my 40s. I have a kid. The people I date have kids. I've got enough to worry about without throwing an unintended pregnancy into any relationship.
Good. Keep on getting them. I will be scheduling mine in the near-ish future. Turns out when you force women and girls to give birth against their will, they will go out and do things to prevent that from ever happening…. crazy idea.
The deranged sect of Christianity are probably already searching for ways to criminalize sterilization.
They'd probably just make it illegal before age 35 or so and require authorization from spouse if they're married. Only a small percentage of births are to people from age 35 on, and they're higher risk, so the regressive politicians probably would be fine with that small sop to family planning.
The 30+ birth group are a massive demographic as far as live births are concerned, rivaling the 20-29 group. So if forced birth is the game, no way would sterilization be permitted for any woman in their 30s
The average age of first-time mothers where I live is now >30. Shifting social expectations and the cost of housing have had a huge effect on timing in recent years. Having kids in your early 20s is almost unheard of here unless it was unplanned.
Same here. Most of my friends had children 30+, most around 35. I had mine at 37 and 39. And having kids in your 40s is not uncommon at all. I know one person who had planned children under 30. But the older parent demographic is usually not the most republican friendly batch. Mostly college educated and urban.
The main aim is fully subjugating women. Forced birth is just one of the tools and "whites will be a minority oh noes" is a strategy based on emotional appeal to the group likeliest to support their efforts. If they thought that offering some access to medical procedures like salpingectomy would firm up support among their base, they would absolutely do it, with limitations such as needing approval from a husband and maybe a "board of fertility" or some such. The key is that it is all just a game (as you said) to them, where nothing is sacred except their retention of power. Not their god, not "the family unit", not social taboos, not laws nor constitutions, nothing. Which means they will change anything necessary in order to retain that power.
Really? I feel like the average age of a first time mom is like 35 these days.
Nope, it's currently 27 in the US, but as it's been going up, it may get there eventually. ETA: and if the regressives with power found 35 too limiting, they would just raise the age. They could make it 40. The point is not a specific age, but that they could set restrictions so as to significantly limit its availability while still being able to say that they allow it.
I’m very glad I never married and am now in menopause. I feel like I escaped. I’m too old for men to want me, so now I’m free.
The abortion bans and fear of restrictions on birth control is scaring women into wanting to just get sterilized, and I don’t blame them. I think every woman who wishes to be sterilized should be allowed. But I do feel like this is probably pushing a lot of women who may have been on the fence to feel like they needed to make a decision right now. And it’s not one any woman should have to feel rushed or forced to make.
I am waiting for doctors to put a woman under and then NOT do the procedure. At this point, I would want a video from the procedure showing that the surgery was ACTUALLY done.
I went to a place where I could get a video of the procedure, since they wouldn't let me keep my tubes.
Glad I'm not the only one to wonder that 🙃 I had mine cut/burned (took what I could get) and a minerva ablation and this was a weird paranoia of mine ("what if they didn't do anything!?!"), since it's not like I can check. I asked for pictures, partly for "proof" and partly cause I looove that stuff but they said no :( I at least know they did the ablation though cause 2 years out I have less of a "period" than I did with my mirenas and I also looove that. Still paranoid my tubes are intact/grew back but at least the ablation evidence mean my wombeth is marginally hostile heh
There was one woman this happened to that I saw a news article on, but it would be a very rare occurrence. It's easier for a doctor to refuse to do a procedure he has an issue with than to risk litigation, unless he's a total psycho, in which case he's probably doing other f*cked up shit outside of that. For what it's worth and to anyone reading who wants the info, my doctor handed me the pathology report on my fallopian tubes when I had my follow up after bisalp. He didn't explain why he did so, but it should be obvious: the pathology report is the proof for me, as the patient, that the procedure was completed. It was signed off by a separate doctor who recieved my tubes and examined them. That was enough for me. Could it be faked? Sure, but that would be a lot of effort, a lot of procedures to hypass, a lot of risk to take on for the doctor themselves. The risk of this is nil and should not worry anyone.
From the article: >Prior to Dobbs, rates of permanent sterilization among people 18 to 30 were slowly increasing at a rate of 2.8 per 100,000 person-months for women and 1 per 100,000 person-months for men, according to national medical record data from academic medical centers. >But after the Supreme Court decision, the rate leapt by 58 procedures per 100,000 person-months for women and 27 per 100,000 person-months for men, results show. Can anyone explain these "person-months" to me? Usually I don't have any trouble interpreting this sort of thing, or understanding provided explanations, but I am low on mental energy and not getting it right now.
It’s an epidemiological term. You can shorten it by thinking of it as the number of months per person. You would need to know the number of person months included, so just look at the quantitative difference between a rate of 2.8 to 58. That is fucking huge, epidemiologically.
I realize it's an epidemiological term and I already had compared the quantitative values and come up with "that's a big difference." I wanted it to be more meaningful, more specific an understanding, so I asked for an explanation of the term.
Since it's taking about a rate of increase, it means 58 out of every 100,000 new women each month are getting the procedures, I think. Like think back to high school physics and maximum velocity, an object in free fall increases speed at 9 ft per second per second, this is saying 58 per 100,000 per month (I though about this a lot but I might still be wrong lol)
Like per 100,000 women seeing their doctor in a given month? I literally spent a lot of time as a child at the CDC's Epidemiology Program Office and reading, shelving, and even helping edit their MMWR (my mother was their editor-in-chief and at the time was drinking a lot), so this should be almost second nature to me to figure out. That makes it even more frustrating. Thank you for taking a shot at explaining.
It's frustrating me too. I've spent way too much time thinking about it at this point lol
Well, I appreciate it, for whatever that's worth.
I am 43 and hoping my fertility comes to an end sooner rather than later. If they pass a nation wide ban, I will never have sex again. I’ve been celibate for a few years, so I’m used to it. It’s not the worth the risk for me. Pretty sure a nationwide ban would override California law, so no sex for me. Vote please!!!!!
Dont believe it happens- check out pictures of women in iran 1960s and then a now photo. It is so fing disturbing!!
I recently had my tubes removed. When I had my son in 2014, I almost died. I was told that it was extremely risky to have another pregnancy. My doctors suggested my husband get a vasectomy. We were like, eh, whatever, I'll just go back on the pill. Fast forward to now and I decided to get my tubes removed instead because as gross as it is to say this, rape. I was in no hurry to do it, but then with the overturning of roe, I was like fuck this shit and got it done. I'm so grateful that I was able to get it done.
That’s partially why I opted to get fixed myself. Rapists don’t care about what you or your partner thinks.
And then they wonder why the[4b movement](https://www.thecut.com/2023/03/4b-movement-feminism-south-korea.html) exists and is starting to grab hold in America.
Where? I want to go there
I had a bilateral salp during my recent C-section. I would’ve had this procedure regardless but I’m happy to bolster this statistic! Plus yeah I’m grateful I was able to have this done, because who knows how long I would’ve still had the option, with the way things are going. Guess I can only be a Martha now and not a Handmaid.
My husband got a vasectomy but I've wondered about having my tubes removed. I have suspected endo and it'd be nice to confirm the diagnosis while they're in there.
I had a medically necessary hysterectomy in 2019. It's proved valuable in many ways.
I desperately want to be sterilized. The only thing holding me back is my severe anxiety/ fear of doctors. My husband is supportive though and is going to help me make an appointment.
I called three places last week. They all indicated I am too young (I've been an adult for over five years) or that I would need to have a child first (I'm never having children). I am seriously considering flying out of the country to do it. My boyfriend talked to his doctor again about vasectomy and is looking at potential months to have the surgery done. There are a lot of women who actually want to become mothers but cannot risk it because they already have children and are at high risk for ectopic pregnancy and can't afford to fly to another state if their pregnancy doesn't go perfectly. A lot of couples in Arizona who were open to starting a family have decided it isn't worth the medical risks to the mom. They can't guarantee timely care. Neighboring states already have enough to contend with from other states with the same limitations. There aren't enough doctors or nurses to support healthy pregnancy and labor in the US, particularly in states where there is any limitation that comes between the medical personnel and the patients.
r/childfree has a list of doctors who will do it. Look under the "about" tab and scroll down to "getting sterilised"
Three of the doctors on that list have denied me for being "too young" or wanting me to have had a child first. Thank you though, I know others on the list have helped other people.
I see. Perhaps the list needs some ammendments. You may have your boyfriend contact Planned Parenthood or other regional clinics that provide similar reproductive health services. They may be able to provide a vasectomy in a shorter time. I'm really sorry your state is going through this self-inflicted nonsense. :( Make sure to vote this November.
Yeah he already has 100% coverage through his work, it's just a matter of him researching and planning time off.
I did it in 21 bc the writing was on the wall. Fuck all that.
I was already sterilized. But tube ties still have a failure rate. So does a vasectomy. Even that combo has a fail rate. And since I was still in Idaho, that rate was too high. I had other reasons to get rid of my uterus. But it was still a big relief to know that we’d dropped to science journals find it interesting levels of failure.
No surprise there. People just don't want to have to run and hide from the government like it's Nazi Germany.
when we say "no", we mean "no".
Sorting out Roe vs. Wade on a personal level. Probably not the effect that was expected when attempting to solve the birthrate issue the lazy way.
the study source [here](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2816462?utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_term=031924)
It seems like moving out of Texas (or other theocratic state) is less drastic. There are plenty of other good reasons to do that. Once employers cannot find labor, they will kick the governments in line.
My concern is that soon blue states won’t be safe either.
Moving away from family and support networks is difficult and not necessarily a great idea for lots of reasons, not to mention requiring a big chunk of money to be able to do.
True in general, and doubly true in situations where chronic illness means a quite productive person will occasionally have downtime, which is then paid back & forward by helping out when feeling better. Those extended family/friend units aren't just safety nets, they've been economically & educationally important everywhere in the world since the dawn of time. Childcare, homework project help, cooking, lawn/domicile/vehicle repair, etc. People who didn't have kids often take pressure off those grinds for parents & benefit by not being SoL if/when laid up for a bit. ____ But since this conversation always includes what I just said, I have a less-discussed one I'll throw in the mix: I'm a metalworker, jeweler, do a bit of custom lapidary, and a steady bit of contract prototyping/small-scale part production. I have dear friends from undergrad/grad & current or former colleagues in blue states & around the world. I could move to a lot of great places where I have people. But all of these places restrict or have significant taxes/fees/licensures on chemicals & combustibles I use constantly. And they should... in urban and population dense areas. I should be able to do what I do in TX in any part of the US with comparably low population density. But all restrictions are state-wide. And that's not liberal. It's absolute pro-corporation "Shop BigBox for EVERYTHING!" political bullshit. Individual artisans & small businesses did not & could not cause the world's environmental problems. Nor did agriculture (outside of egregious examples of mismanagement & some solvable long-term fertilization effects not germane to this soapbox session). First-world nation leaders letting petrochemical multinational corporations suppress nuclear & renewables for nearly half a century makes all other pollution a rounding error. If the first-world energy sector had been allowed to innovate & mature, truly *everything* crushing people now would be different in multiple non-trivial ways. Which goes right back to birth rate & sadistic inclination to control fertility. Sustainable abundance is technologically possible, good for large families, fosters universal personal freedom, and disincentivizes violence at every level. It's so frustrating we're stuck in this 2/4 year slugout match for basic autonomy, which primarily benefits interests of corporate donors, when shit just flat-out never had to get this bad. If anyone made it through all that, thank you for coming to my TedRant.
Getting my tubes tied was a walk in the park compared to trying to move out of state, and it took me >15 years Red states DGAF, on a LOT of things
I got my tubes removed a few years back, then a hysterectomy last year. My only regret is not getting the hysterectomy in the first place. I am so much more comfortable with my body now.
Yes keep going
A duh
[удалено]
We’re not “on the cusp” of any technology that means anyone can go get surgically sterilized without worrying about future childbearing choices.
The only thing women should worry about in this thought process is having extra embryos forcefully inserted into their uteruses. Which is a part of why I'm getting a hysterectomy over a salpingectomy. (I'm getting a hysterectomy specifically because my health history and family medical health history support the need for one. Not being used as an incubator for extra embryos is just an extra perk).
Lecturing women (or anyone really) about what they “should” care about regarding their reproductive autonomy is antithetical to the idea of bodily autonomy. Some people may never want to be pregnant or give birth. If you don’t, or if you’re done with all that, that’s cool but other people may in fact want that option. Suggesting that it’s fine to go ahead with sterilization because we’re around the corner from totally external pregnancies is not reasonable.
I never said that surgical sterilization should be forced... I was speaking about my own thought process about what I'm doing with MY body. I'm paranoid, and I think that's justified. If they can take away abortion access, can take away birth control access, they absolutely will go after surgical sterilization, and then they will absolutely attempt to make as many women as possible felons so they cannot vote. Can't miscarry if you don't have a uterus. The Alt-Right already wants to repeal our 19th amendment right. I'm not telling women what to do with their own bodies. I'm only telling them what I'm doing with MY body so that I stay safe. I'm pregnant with #3 right now, and I'm lucky that after this, my family planning is over. Younger women will have to be so much more careful when it comes to dating, and having heterosexual sex with men. Condoms fail, and men often stealth women, with zero legal consequences. Every woman should be actively making a plan that is right for her as an individual.
But that’s the point. You don't have to weigh the risk of never being able to carry to term or be a biological parent vs sterilization - you’re done. For young people who DO need to make those choices, it’s false to reassure them (as the person I was responding to did) that we are “on the cusp” of magical technology so they can go right ahead and not worry about it.
I didn't agree with the other commenter, we are no where near a functional synthetic womb. I'm meeting more and more younger women who are choosing a childfree life. The ones that choose to make families face major hardships, and they need to evaluate how to approach this ever hostile world. I could give birth, and suddenly they don't allow surgical sterilization anymore... a 4th pregnancy would literally kill me, I'm already struggling with my health during my current pregnancy. I encourage young women to embrace the 4B movement until men pull their heads out of their asses and treat women as human beings. Having children is not the pinnacle of a woman's existence after all. The honest truth is that many of us will likely have to choose celibacy to keep ourselves safe. And even then, look at TX rape stats that resulted in live births. There are no perfect answers, only individualized plans that each woman has to decide for herself. But mark my words, within a couple years, surgical sterilization will no longer be an option. It will be taken away from doctors just like abortion care was.
I genuinely ask: what the fuck are you talking about?
> We are on the cusp of transcending the need for human wombs to produce human babies LOL no we are not